It seems to me that there are two separate issues here. The one being discussed is quality of angler experience in terms of crowding on the rivers. The conservation of Skeena steelhead is coincidentally related, but isn't an inter-dependent issue unless BC and DFO values recreational fishing revenue as much as or more than commercial fishing derived revenue.

I always have had mixed feelings about getting involved in either issue. BC is a provence of Canada, a sovereign nation. As much as I enjoy fishing in BC, if they don't want anglers from the US or even Alberta taking up space on their rivers, that's really their business, and it doesn't matter whether the reason is river crowding, perceived effects on fish conservation, or if they just think we talk funny. It's BC's resource to manage or mismanage as they see fit. If they want US angler dollars, fine; if they don't, well I think it's their choice to forego that tourism revenue. It's the same thing with steelhead conservation. I recognize that they have an internal conflict between BC Fish & Wildlife and Canada's DFO, but it's an internal affair. I don't think it's any more appropriate to tell Canada and BC how to manage their fish than it is for the US to tell other nations how to manage their governments (altho we do it almost routinely).

I think it's more appropriate if the BC beneficiaries of tourism revenue choose to step up to the plate and involve themselves in the discussion about any limits placed on alien angler participation in BC sport fishing. Of course, there's nothing wrong in our reminding those providers that our tourism is conditioned on our continued fishing opportunities; that we don't visit them just to enjoy rustic accomodations and their cheerful Canadian accents, eh?

Sg